Write about the Reflective Questions for Structural and Managerial System.
An organizational system comprises of four sub systems namely technical system, cultural system, structural system and managerial system. The technical system includes basic equipments and techniques that are necessary for the production process. The structural system includes the policies and procedures of an organization that are to be followed by the organizational employees (Cabri and Blake 2016). The cultural system comprises of the relationships between the employees and their behavioral patterns. The managerial system comprises of the activities related to directing, controlling and organizing the organizational activities towards the achievement of the objectives of the organization (Davis et al. 2014).
I view organization as a combination of several sub systems. The processes within an organization cannot work alone instead, the processes are dependent on each other. For instance only technical system is not enough to generate desired outcome. Human resources are necessary to control the technical system and to manage the operations of an organization in order to obtain desired results. A single system when alone is incomplete and incapable of producing desired outcomes. All the elements within an organization are inter- related and inter- dependent upon each other (Dalpiaz, Giorgini and Mylopoulos 2013).
Socio- technical system is a combination of social and technical processes. A socio- technical system is a combination of computer, software, business processes, organizational rules and human resources. Any changes in the social element can have a drastic impact on the technical activities. For instance, in case less efficient human resources replace the more efficient human resources involved in the technical processes, then the technical activities tend to slow down or create more errors (Bowker 2014). Therefore, it is necessary to maintain a balance between social and technical aspects of an organization.
The socio- technical system involves several approaches such as organizing the processes, flattening the hierarchy, utilizing teams for managing activities, allowing the customers to decide the performance and rewarding the performance of the team. I believe that organizations are an open system that interacts with the environment. An organization does not exist in vacuum due to which the success of an organization is dependent upon the way it interacts with the environment. The success of an organization is largely dependent upon the interaction between its internal employees as well as the interaction with the outside customers (Jones, Artikis and Pitt 2013).
I believe that efficient socio- technical systems are necessary for the success of an organization. No organization can achieve its objectives without establishing a sound socio- technical system. For instance, socio- technical system has been efficiently used by Toyota. Toyota has efficiently utilized the socio- technical system approaches along with lean production principles. The company has used the work design model that has helped the company to understand the organization’s work practices and its impact upon the performance of the employees. The company has conducted several surveys through which it has come to know that the middle management in the company is necessary for the implementation of the lean system that helps in the utilization of social and technical systems (CORPORATION., 2017)
Toyota Motor corporation was founded in the year 1937 by Kiichiro Toyoda as a multinational automotive company. The company has its headquarters in Aichi, Japan. Toyota is the largest automobile manufacturing company in the world. The company has a wide product line that comprises of cars, buses, motorsports, electric vehicles and is also involved in several non- automotive activities such as aerospace, robotics and philanthropy. The company has been manufacturing superior quality vehicles since 75 years and has a world- wide presence. The company has efficiently utilized its socio- technical system and the lean production system in order to achieve the desired outcomes (CORPORATION., 2017).
The company’s organizational structure is based upon its varied business activities all over the world. The company efficiently utilizes its structure to achieve its aims and objectives. The company has its structure linked with the Japanese traditional business structures (CORPORATION., 2017). The company has efficiently used its organizational structure in order to improve its operations and capacity utilization. Toyota follows global hierarchy, geographical divisions and product- based divisions as its organizational structure. The company has vested the decision- making power in the hands of the regional and business unit heads. The business unit heads are responsible to report to the headquarters of the company in Japan. The company also has eight regional divisions and each of the unit’s heads report to the company’s headquarters (CORPORATION., 2017). The company also has four divisions according to its products that supports the brand development and improvement in the product line.
The managerial sub- system in my organization that is Toyota is highly effective in improving the efficiency of the organization. For example, the TPS (Toyota Production System) of the organization utilizes several conversion processes in order to motivate changes at group levels. The immediate supervisors are responsible for managing conflicts and sustaining the change within the organization. The TPS ensures that all the sub- systems of the company work together towards the achievement of the organizational objectives (Koukoulaki 2014). TPS motivates the suppliers of the company to involve kaizen without affecting the stable procedure. The company does not expect its suppliers to follow their values and principles but they are required to abide by certain basic principles of the company. The TPS system of Toyota ensures that there is proper coordination and integration among the managerial sub- systems. The management and the production system of the company work closely in order to obtain the desired results. The human resources within the organization are responsible for ensuring proper quality production and minimizing the defects. Therefore, I would like to conclude that the various divisions of the company and the human resources of the company work together in order to achieve the desired results.
Human resource interventions are very important in improving both individual and team performance. Human resource interventions help in improving inter- personal skills. I have personally participated in HR interventions that aims at improving inter- personal skills especially team- building. Firstly, the hierarchical decision- making system is removed from an organization (Saurin and Werle 2017). The power of taking decisions are no longer vested in the hands of only higher authorities instead, the focus is on the groups are prepared that have the proper understanding of the organization’s aims and objectives. The employees from various departments form a group and discuss regarding the important topics. The employees are engaged in the decision- making process in order to obtain better ideas. In order to build trust among the employees, open communication is encouraged within the organization. This creates an environment of mutual trust and co- operation (Edel et al. 2017). The managers are required to slowly build the trust among its employees and reduce the unwanted competition within the organization. Some amount of competition is good for an organization but beyond certain limit, the competition becomes harmful for the organizations. Collaborative conditions are very useful in improving the team spirit and communication and help the employees feel important for the organization. An employee invests his or her skills, abilities, knowledge and time for attaining the objectives of an organization therefore, the employers are also required to work for the overall development of the employees and help them achieve their career goals. This can be done by providing employee benefits and other facilities to the employees in order to help him or her work efficiently. The employees are provided the opportunity to take active part in the decision- making processes. This has helped in making the employees feel important to the organization and has also helped in increasing the loyalty of the employees towards the organization.
The two types of HR interventions are as follows:
T- groups: I have chosen T- group because it is the type of group training wherein the participants learn about themselves by interacting with each other. This process uses the process of feedback, role playing and problem solving techniques. A T- group meeting does not have a specific agenda and goal instead, the participants are encouraged by a facilitator to express and share their feelings and emotions in exchange of actions and words of the other participants (Guest 2015). The major focus is on expressing the emotions rather than obtaining any conclusions. The members of T- group develop inter- personal skills and self- understanding. Since ages, the organizations have been using this method for the purpose of building teams and implementing corporate culture. This process involves openness and helps the members to adopt a positive attitude towards the achievement of the objectives.
Team building: I have chosen team building because it involves a group of activities that help in enhancing the social relations and defining the roles within the associations that involves collaborative tasks. This concept is completely different from that of team training as it aims at exposing and addressing the the inter- personal issues within a team. It helps in improving the performance of the entire team as it is aligned towards the goals and involves building efficient working relationships among the members (Martin, Carron and Burke 2016). It also aims at reducing the ambiguity among the team members in term of role and responsibilities and helps in finding solutions to the issues faced by the team.
Bowker, G., 2014. Social science, technical systems, and cooperative work: Beyond the great divide. Psychology Press.
Cabri, G. and Blake, M.B., 2016, June. 14th Adaptive Computing (and Agents) for Enhanced Collaboration: Adaptive Approaches for Socio-technical Systems. In Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WETICE), 2016 IEEE 25th International Conference on (pp. 1-2). IEEE.
CORPORATION., T. (2017). Toyota Global Site | History of Toyota. [online] Toyota Motor Corporation Global Website. Available at: https://www.toyota-global.com/company/history_of_toyota/ [Accessed 14 Aug. 2017].
Cummings, T.G. and Worley, C.G., 2014. Organization development and change. Cengage learning.
Dalpiaz, F., Giorgini, P. and Mylopoulos, J., 2013. Adaptive socio-technical systems: a requirements-based approach. Requirements engineering, 18(1), pp.1-24.
Davis, M.C., Challenger, R., Jayewardene, D.N. and Clegg, C.W., 2014. Advancing socio-technical systems thinking: A call for bravery. Applied ergonomics, 45(2), pp.171-180.]
Edel, M.A., Hölter, T., Wassink, K. and Juckel, G., 2017. A comparison of mindfulness-based group training and skills group training in adults with ADHD: an open study. Journal of attention disorders, 21(6), pp.533-539.
Guest, D., 2015. Team building, team challenges. Appita Journal: Journal of the Technical Association of the Australian and New Zealand Pulp and Paper Industry, 68(2), p.87.
Jones, A.J., Artikis, A. and Pitt, J., 2013. The design of intelligent socio-technical systems. Artificial Intelligence Review, 39(1), pp.5-20.
Koukoulaki, T., 2014. The impact of lean production on musculoskeletal and psychosocial risks: An examination of sociotechnical trends over 20 years. Applied Ergonomics, 45(2), pp.198-212.
Martin, L.J., Carron, A.V. and Burke, S.M., 2016. Team building interventions in sport: A meta-analysis.
Saurin, T.A. and Werle, N.J.B., 2017. A framework for the analysis of slack in socio-technical systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 167, pp.439-451.